SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Re: an iSCSI name format for gateways?



    
    Robert,
    Perhaps the best way to go after this is to bring this to the Naming and
    Discovery Team (NDT), so that they can deep dive into it, as we have done
    with the other naming related things.  So let me see if I can schedule some
    time with the NDT and I will get back with you.  Please send me a note off
    the reflector on the time frame you would like to have this meeting, and
    the time frame for the output from the NDT.  I will set something up for
    you to present to the NDT.
    
    .
    .
    .
    John L. Hufferd
    Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
    IBM/SSG San Jose Ca
    Main Office (408) 256-0403, Tie: 276-0403,  eFax: (408) 904-4688
    Home Office (408) 997-6136, Cell: (408) 499-9702
    Internet address: hufferd@us.ibm.com
    
    
    Robert Grant <Robert.Grant@mcdata.com>@ece.cmu.edu on 04/18/2002 08:33:29
    AM
    
    Sent by:    owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    
    
    To:    ips@ece.cmu.edu
    cc:
    Subject:    an iSCSI name format for gateways?
    
    
    
    Hello,
    
    The gateway "sub-group" has had a few discussions around node naming - and
    I
    thought I would see what the wider community thought about one of the
    ideas.
    Note that this issue doesn't concern the current iSCSI documents (which
    aren't attempting to address gateway issues) - so I definitely do not
    intend
    to de-rail their march to closure/last call!
    
    I'd like to gage people's reaction to having a form of the iSCSI node name
    for gateways. I think this idea was mentioned at Huntington Beach in
    reaction to Dave Petersen's presentation on portal groups. Dave's
    presentation suggested that two separate gateways presenting the same FC
    node could present a single node (with an "eui." name) with 2 portal
    groups.
    An alternative suggested was the gateways should present the FC node as two
    separate iSCSI nodes (so that each gateway would be an entirely separate
    I_T_nexus).
    
    One drawback of this alternative is that the configuration of the iSCSI
    network couldn't extend to the FC node but rather only to the gateway (for
    example, there'd be no way to have the FC node be a member of an iSNS
    discovery domain - only each individual gateway).
    
    An iSCSI node name format for gateways might be like the "eui." form -
    along
    the lines of "gw.nodeEUI64.gatewayEUI64". This could allow the separate
    node/I_T_nexus presentation as suggested but still provide a "handle" (the
    root "gw.nodeEUI64") to be configured for discovery (i.e. iSNS or SLP). Or
    -
    rather than a new "gw." form, maybe just an expanded "eui." form or an
    expanded "iqn." form by setting aside a specific URL
    (like iqn.2002-04.com.fciscsigateways.nodeEUI64.gatewayEUI64).
    
    Having a name format like this doesn't address some aspects (like setting a
    mode page on "gw.nodeEUI64#1.gatewayEUI64#1" might also effect
    "gw.nodeEUI64#1.gatewayEUI64#2"), but it could be helpful for configuration
    of discovery.
    
    All comments welcome.
    
    Regards,
    Rob
    
    Rob Grant
    McDATA Corporation
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Fri Apr 19 17:18:25 2002
9730 messages in chronological order